<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (3) TMI 186 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51523</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed by Madras HC based on the decision in CCE v. Oswal Cotton Spinning Mills, setting aside the earlier judgment in CCE v. Addison &amp;amp; Company. The refund claim was denied initially, but credit notes were issued to buyers, shifting the burden back to the manufacturer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 12:22:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 186 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51523</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed by Madras HC based on the decision in CCE v. Oswal Cotton Spinning Mills, setting aside the earlier judgment in CCE v. Addison &amp;amp; Company. The refund claim was denied initially, but credit notes were issued to buyers, shifting the burden back to the manufacturer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51523</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>